Re: scope of linux in the corporates...

John Hasler wrote:

girish writes:
What if - the developed software makes use of GPL libraries (the'libc) is
present in a ROM.

Glibc is LGPL, not GPL.

Now the ROM is not exactly distributed standalone. Would that still be
considered as a Distributed Binary & that user has right to claim the
sources?

It doesn't matter whether it is distributed "standalone" or complete with
an all-girl band. A copy is a copy, whether on paper tape or the hard
disk of a mainframe computer.

There are certain decisions I need to make in my application based on
contents which are generated by Open Source HTTP server. Whether such
contents used in my application will be considered as derivatives of GPL
work & subsequently enforcing all those copyright and/or licenses on my
work as well?

The output of a GPL program is not subject to the GPL.

I do believe that was inappropriately over-generalized. e.g. if the input
is a GPL program sources and the GPL program is the software development
tool chain then the result would be GPL also.
Perhaps "not necessarily subject" would be more accurate.

--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Linking nsswitch apps statically?
    ... linking to it statically brings the linked program under the GPL too. ... This is stated within the LGPL. ... I have to confess that I thought glibc was somehow exempt; ... personal experience from more than the last ten years into account, ...
    (comp.unix.programmer)
  • Re: 2.6.24-rc7-rt2
    ... this is most definitely a "derived" work from glibc. ... _GPL version because the code was from LGPL and not from strict GPL. ... tell what in the license forbids me to make a global replacement ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: static vs dynamic compiled versions of programs redhat 9.0 segmentation fault
    ... > Unfortunetly I don't have source code to do this. ... If the program uses glibc or any other library under the GPL or LGPL ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.system)
  • Re: A fucking bunch of lying pussies
    ... > you cannot have freeware sections integrated in a GPL program, ... > holder still has rights under the law, by including his source in a GPL ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: scope of linux in the corporates...
    ... present in a ROM. ... Glibc is LGPL, not GPL. ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)